About two weeks ago,Thailand military led by army commander ousted Prime Minister Thaksin electedly government in a bloodless coup,the reportedly poll showed that more than 50 percent of Thais like the prime minister thaksin ousted due to allegation of his corruptions .

now the coup junta appointed former Thai army chief Gen. Surayud Chulanont as Thailand interim Prime Minster,Surayud agreed elections scheduled for next year,but a temporary constitution announced two days ago still reserved considerable powers for the coup leaders,a fact expected to unnerve the the rights activists.

Under the temporary constitution,approved by the King the military concil or the coup leaders have the right to remove the Prime Minster and his Cabnet and have final say to the speaker of National Assembly and a 100 members committee which will write next new constitution.

But many rights activists in Thailand said that the coup leaders had appointed one of its own,to head a military dictatorship,the government is illegitimate,some of them had protested against the coup.

Many international obsevers said that Thailand democracy suffered a setback ,many foreign leaders have urged that Thailand should be restored rights to its people.

Hooray! Thanks for making a thread about this!
I was very disappointed when I found out that the US was making sanctions against Thailand.
Frankly, I don't see what the big deal is. The Thais didn't like their PM (for good reason!), so they got rid of him quickly and bloodlessly. I wish WE (in the USA) could do that- instead of following our administration like blind sheep.
Sorry to be dense, but it seems like just because it's called a "coup", the world is going crazy, when in reality it was well-deserved and bloodless._________________peace-monger

Hooray! Thanks for making a thread about this!
I was very disappointed when I found out that the US was making sanctions against Thailand.
Frankly, I don't see what the big deal is. The Thais didn't like their PM (for good reason!), so they got rid of him quickly and bloodlessly. I wish WE (in the USA) could do that- instead of following our administration like blind sheep.
Sorry to be dense, but it seems like just because it's called a "coup", the world is going crazy, when in reality it was well-deserved and bloodless.

The biggest mistake which Thaksin made during last six monthes was that he didn't resign as Prime Minster and the head of his party after many protests by his oppositions.If he had resigned the Thailand wouldn't have been a coup which is not good for the Thailand in the long run.

Maybe Thaksin is a corrupted leader who is accused of corruption and many wrong doings,but a coup is not the best way to solve these issues,according to recent reports Thailand has experienced more than dozen of coups in this century,this seriously effected Thai international image and economic developments,so far there are not evidences to probe whether Thaksin is guilty or not ,we have to wait and see.

However if military is intervening a state's power and administration,this country is probably under police ruling,their people don't have much liberty and civil rights,let's take Burma for example,the Burma once was one of the most prosperous countries in South-east Asia,after the military junta took power this country has been suffering a lot,now Burma is one of poorest countries in the world.

Maybe Thailand is an exception ,she has experienced many coups ,she has its own way to solve some issues,but coup can't be encoraged in the modern civilized world even though the coup is bloodless which many coups in human history were bloody and brutal.

Hooray! Thanks for making a thread about this!
I was very disappointed when I found out that the US was making sanctions against Thailand.
Frankly, I don't see what the big deal is. The Thais didn't like their PM (for good reason!), so they got rid of him quickly and bloodlessly. I wish WE (in the USA) could do that- instead of following our administration like blind sheep.
Sorry to be dense, but it seems like just because it's called a "coup", the world is going crazy, when in reality it was well-deserved and bloodless.

The biggest mistake which Thaksin made during last six monthes was that he didn't resign as Prime Minster and the head of his party after many protests by his oppositions.If he had resigned the Thailand wouldn't have been a coup which is not good for the Thailand in the long run.

Maybe Thaksin is a corrupted leader who is accused of corruption and many wrong doings,but a coup is not the best way to solve these issues,according to recent reports Thailand has experienced more than dozen of coups in this century,this seriously effected Thai international image and economic developments,so far there are not evidences to probe whether Thaksin is guilty or not ,we have to wait and see.

However if military is intervening a state's power and administration,this country is probably under police ruling,their people don't have much liberty and civil rights,let's take Burma for example,the Burma once was one of the most prosperous countries in South-east Asia,after the military junta took power this country has been suffering a lot,now Burma is one of poorest countries in the world.

Maybe Thailand is an exception ,she has experienced many coups ,she has its own way to solve some issues,but coup can't be encoraged in the modern civilized world even though the coup is bloodless which many coups in human history were bloody and brutal.

Burma is different-
Burma was taken over by another country, it didn't just have the army IN it. The army that was in Burma was from England, not Burma.
The Thai is occupied by it's own army- this is a different situation.

Why can't THIS couip be encouraged, since THIS one WAS bloodless and well-deserved?
If we didn't call it a coup, would it then be ok?_________________peace-monger

Burma is different-
Burma was taken over by another country, it didn't just have the army IN it. The army that was in Burma was from England, not Burma.
The Thai is occupied by it's own army- this is a different situation.

Why can't THIS couip be encouraged, since THIS one WAS bloodless and well-deserved?
If we didn't call it a coup, would it then be ok?

I don't know much about Burmese historical background,but I do know that Burma has been suffering a lot under Burmese military junta .

If we encourage to use coup to take over the power of any country,then the democracy and freedom will be in peril ,imagining :if U.S.had a coup in which the Bush or Clinton administrations was ousted,what would the consequence be?it was possible that the US would be in chaos and there would be many conflicts between Republicans and Democrats,Republicans wanted to oust Democrats'government by coup,whereas the democrats wanted to oust Republicans 'government by coup,if so there would not be peace in the US,the US would be degradated to second-class country in the world.

Because using coup to get power is illegitimate in modern civilized world,if we encourage this actions there will be more bloody conflicts inside the country,when you use coup to take over power,then others will think that they will use coup to overthrow you,the power by using coup to get is always in dangerous ,this country will always be instable ,their economy will not develop well.

The best way to solve domestic issues is through constitution and laws,through democratic process,military needs to stay in neutral,if military intervene in domestic issues,then that country will possibly becom police state,the liberty and civil rights of people in that country will be severely deprived ,do you like to see this will happen in the US?

Burma is different-
Burma was taken over by another country, it didn't just have the army IN it. The army that was in Burma was from England, not Burma.
The Thai is occupied by it's own army- this is a different situation.

Why can't THIS couip be encouraged, since THIS one WAS bloodless and well-deserved?
If we didn't call it a coup, would it then be ok?

I don't know much about Burmese historical background,but I do know that Burma has been suffering a lot under Burmese military junta .

If we encourage to use coup to take over the power of any country,then the democracy and freedom will be in peril ,imagining :if U.S.had a coup in which the Bush or Clinton administrations was ousted,what would the consequence be?it was possible that the US would be in chaos and there would be many conflicts between Republicans and Democrats,Republicans wanted to oust Democrats'government by coup,whereas the democrats wanted to oust Republicans 'government by coup,if so there would not be peace in the US,the US would be degradated to second-class country in the world.

Because using coup to get power is illegitimate in modern civilized world,if we encourage this actions there will be more bloody conflicts inside the country,when you use coup to take over power,then others will think that they will use coup to overthrow you,the power by using coup to get is always in dangerous ,this country will always be instable ,their economy will not develop well.

The best way to solve domestic issues is through constitution and laws,through democratic process,military needs to stay in neutral,if military intervene in domestic issues,then that country will possibly becom police state,the liberty and civil rights of people in that country will be severely deprived ,do you like to see this will happen in the US?

The novel Finding George Orwell in Burma has some great Burmese historical info- it's a great read, too.

In theory, all of this would be true. However, we all know that the system of justice (at least in the US) has gone corrupted by man's competitve need for power and money.
Actually, I don't think coups (as long as they're peaceful and progressive) are so bad.
Instead, the majority of the US follows Bush like blind sheep, while he tricks us and makes awful, unethical, and harmful decisions on our behalf (to boost his public appearance)!
It would be best, in theory, to use constitutional and domestic laws improve the country, but seeing as the "justice" system isn't of much help lately, I don't think it'll do much good.
In reality, forceful (but nonviolent, of course) efforts towards peace really are the best option- peace is the way._________________peace-monger

Last edited by flying_pig319 on Sat Oct 07, 2006 7:11 pm; edited 1 time in total

Burma is different-
Burma was taken over by another country, it didn't just have the army IN it. The army that was in Burma was from England, not Burma.
The Thai is occupied by it's own army- this is a different situation.

Why can't THIS couip be encouraged, since THIS one WAS bloodless and well-deserved?
If we didn't call it a coup, would it then be ok?

I don't know much about Burmese historical background,but I do know that Burma has been suffering a lot under Burmese military junta .

If we encourage to use coup to take over the power of any country,then the democracy and freedom will be in peril ,imagining :if U.S.had a coup in which the Bush or Clinton administrations was ousted,what would the consequence be?it was possible that the US would be in chaos and there would be many conflicts between Republicans and Democrats,Republicans wanted to oust Democrats'government by coup,whereas the democrats wanted to oust Republicans 'government by coup,if so there would not be peace in the US,the US would be degradated to second-class country in the world.

Because using coup to get power is illegitimate in modern civilized world,if we encourage this actions there will be more bloody conflicts inside the country,when you use coup to take over power,then others will think that they will use coup to overthrow you,the power by using coup to get is always in dangerous ,this country will always be instable ,their economy will not develop well.

The best way to solve domestic issues is through constitution and laws,through democratic process,military needs to stay in neutral,if military intervene in domestic issues,then that country will possibly becom police state,the liberty and civil rights of people in that country will be severely deprived ,do you like to see this will happen in the US?

The novel Finding George Orwell in Burma has some great Burmese historical info- it's a great read, too.

In theory, all of this would be true. However, we all know that the system of justice (at least in the US) has gone corrupted by man's competitve need for power and money.
Actually, I think it would be FABULOUS if the US had a coup, as long as it was like the "coup" that Thailand just had- in other words, a quick, bloodless one to get rid of an unjust president.
Instead, the majority of the US follows Bush like blind sheep, while he tricks us and makes awful, unethical, and harmful decisions on our behalf (to boost his public appearance)!
It would be best, in theory, to use constitutional and domestic laws to get rid of Bush, but seeing as the "justice" system has been warped and skewed to his benefit (he IS the president), we can't really use his own justice system to get rid of him (though you'd think we'd be able to, since this idea is only just!)
In reality, forceful efforts towards peace really are the best option- peace is the way, even if we must use a little bit of war to get there (just to compensate for the sometimes ugliness of human nature that comes out as people like Bush).

I can understand that you are dissatisfied with Bush administration,now many people in the US are angry about Bush,his approving rate is just about 40 percent right now,but he will just serve the country for next two years,then in 2008 the US will have a presidential election,the people of US will decide who is their next president.

If now a coup overthrew Bush administration,you would be satisfied,but over 40 percent of people in the US would be angry about the coup,many people who even disagree with Bush would not agree on the coup,so that was sure that over 50 percent of people in the US would be against the coup.Some army officails are lean to Republic although they should stay in neutral ,once there was a coup ousted Bush administration these army offcials who lean to Republic would be considering launching another coup to overthrow the coup leaders,in reality if there is a coup in the US nobody will benefit from it in the long run.

You can disagree with Bush,but Bush is elected by majority of Americans ,this indicates that he was supported by majority of Americans,he is a legitimate president just like his many predecessors,if anyone wants to use coup to overthrow Bush administration he or she will be punished by US constitution and laws,I don't think that anyone in the US will take the life risk to commit this severe crime.

he is a liar, why the people voted for him is because of lies and of culture, why there are still people voting for him is because they still believe in his lies_________________If I say "I love you" to someone, then I also have to say "I also love everyone else inside you, I love the whole world because of you, I also love myself inside you." -- Erich Fromm, the Art of Love

he is a liar, why the people voted for him is because of lies and of culture, why there are still people voting for him is because they still believe in his lies

He's right-- Bush was NOT elected by the people of the US, he tricked his way into election (forcing minorities, who would've voted against him, away from the voting booths, etc.). Also, Bush didn't even WIN the popular vote, only the electoral college, so it is not true that the majority of Americans voted for him.

Regardless, I think a non-violent "coup" (if it really IS a coup if it's non-violent) is a perfectly legit way to get rid of an unjust authority._________________peace-monger

he is a liar, why the people voted for him is because of lies and of culture, why there are still people voting for him is because they still believe in his lies

He's right-- Bush was NOT elected by the people of the US, he tricked his way into election (forcing minorities, who would've voted against him, away from the voting booths, etc.). Also, Bush didn't even WIN the popular vote, only the electoral college, so it is not true that the majority of Americans voted for him.

Regardless, I think a non-violent "coup" (if it really IS a coup if it's non-violent) is a perfectly legit way to get rid of an unjust authority.

I am not Republicans or Democrat,in some extent almost all politicians are liars,the key is who is smart liar and who is stupid liar.Before invading Iraq,both democratic senators and Republic senators and their congressmen and congresswomen supported to invade Iraq basing same intelligent information provided by intelligence agencies that Iraq had Weapon of Mass Destruction.Following the unpolular of Iraqi war,democrats began to oppose Iraqi war,this is very ridiculous ,they want to win midterm elections on November this year so they adapt their competition strategy .

Bush won Al Gore in 2000 presidential disputed election by decision of supreme court which solved the dispute peacefully by stopping recounting the voting ,in 2004 Bush won senator Kerry by large majority ,so Bush is legitimate president of the United States of America.

Are you two assuming that majority of Americans are morons?

I have heard somebody said that Bush is an idiot and he is *beep*,but the fact is that Bush graduated from a famous university of Yale and he once was popular governer of Texas.

It is unreasonable when you disagree with someone that you say he is liars or something like that and other people who support him are morons,other people have different opinons with you,this doesn't mean they are lower in intelligent than you ,you just have different understanding about certain things,people who voted for Bush are not easily cheated just like you ,they have their own judgements.

he is a liar, why the people voted for him is because of lies and of culture, why there are still people voting for him is because they still believe in his lies

He's right-- Bush was NOT elected by the people of the US, he tricked his way into election (forcing minorities, who would've voted against him, away from the voting booths, etc.). Also, Bush didn't even WIN the popular vote, only the electoral college, so it is not true that the majority of Americans voted for him.

Regardless, I think a non-violent "coup" (if it really IS a coup if it's non-violent) is a perfectly legit way to get rid of an unjust authority.

I am not Republicans or Democrat,in some extent almost all politicians are liars,the key is who is smart liar and who is stupid liar.Before invading Iraq,both democratic senators and Republic senators and their congressmen and congresswomen supported to invade Iraq basing same intelligent information provided by intelligence agencies that Iraq had Weapon of Mass Destruction.Following the unpolular of Iraqi war,democrats began to oppose Iraqi war,this is very ridiculous ,they want to win midterm elections on November this year so they adapt their competition strategy .

The Bush administration had NO reason to believe that Iraq was holding WMD. The only reason they went in there was so Bush could kill all the Iraqis and further his macho appearance to the American citizens.

ltp-008 wrote:

Bush won Al Gore in 2000 presidential disputed election by decision of supreme court which solved the dispute peacefully by stopping recounting the voting ,in 2004 Bush won senator Kerry by large majority ,so Bush is legitimate president of the United States of America.

Even if the vote tally was correct, if Bush's people forced minorities out of voting booths, they wouldn't have voted alltogether, so the vote tally wouldn't have acurately represented the people's wishes.
A correct vote tally does not mean a correct representation of the voters (at least not with Bush around).

ltp-008 wrote:

Are you two assuming that majority of Americans are morons?

Of course! It's the government's own fault for spending too little money on education. Maybe if the American people were more well-educated, they'd know not to elect such STUPID governments in the first place!

ltp-008 wrote:

I have heard somebody said that Bush is an idiot and he is *beep*,but the fact is that Bush graduated from a famous university of Yale and he once was popular governer of Texas.

Popularity (especially of Texans, not to be generalizing) doesn't equal a just politican. It only equals a liked politican (for who-knows-what reason).
Also, graduating from Yale doesn't mean one is smart or just. It COULD mean these things, but it could also just mean the graduate is wealthy or celebrity-esque (and seeing that Bush's father was a president, I think this is the clear reason).

ltp-008 wrote:

It is unreasonable when you disagree with someone that you say he is liars or something like that and other people who support him are morons,other people have different opinons with you,this doesn't mean they are lower in intelligent than you ,you just have different understanding about certain things,people who voted for Bush are not easily cheated just like you ,they have their own judgements.

This argument really gets on my one last nerve.
NOT EVERYTHING IS "JUST SOMEONE'S OPINION", SOME THINGS ARE SIMPLY WRONG.
Bush is KILLING innocent people in Iraq. That's just his opinion?
Bush is not helping the thousands of homeless, starving families in America. That's just his opinion?
Bush is providing a poorly-educated new generation that will, someday, compose the politicians and leaders of America! That's just his opinion?
NO. These things are WRONG.
Death, homelessness, poor education? These things are wrong any way you slice them!

The REASON these people have a "different understanding" than I do is because they were badly educated by previous governments in the first place. Don't you see the cycle?

Some people don't see Bush's mistakes. This isn't their "opinion, that's just as justifiable as mine". No. This is WRONG. That's all it is!
It's not their fault, they probably were badly educated or malnourished or smoke pot in highschool or something else the government could be solving right now. But their opinion is NOT equal to everyone else's (in the respect of Bush's choices). It's WRONG._________________peace-monger

he is a liar, why the people voted for him is because of lies and of culture, why there are still people voting for him is because they still believe in his lies

He's right-- Bush was NOT elected by the people of the US, he tricked his way into election (forcing minorities, who would've voted against him, away from the voting booths, etc.). Also, Bush didn't even WIN the popular vote, only the electoral college, so it is not true that the majority of Americans voted for him.

Regardless, I think a non-violent "coup" (if it really IS a coup if it's non-violent) is a perfectly legit way to get rid of an unjust authority.

I am not Republicans or Democrat,in some extent almost all politicians are liars,the key is who is smart liar and who is stupid liar.Before invading Iraq,both democratic senators and Republic senators and their congressmen and congresswomen supported to invade Iraq basing same intelligent information provided by intelligence agencies that Iraq had Weapon of Mass Destruction.Following the unpolular of Iraqi war,democrats began to oppose Iraqi war,this is very ridiculous ,they want to win midterm elections on November this year so they adapt their competition strategy .

The Bush administration had NO reason to believe that Iraq was holding WMD. The only reason they went in there was so Bush could kill all the Iraqis and further his macho appearance to the American citizens.

ltp-008 wrote:

Bush won Al Gore in 2000 presidential disputed election by decision of supreme court which solved the dispute peacefully by stopping recounting the voting ,in 2004 Bush won senator Kerry by large majority ,so Bush is legitimate president of the United States of America.

Even if the vote tally was correct, if Bush's people forced minorities out of voting booths, they wouldn't have voted alltogether, so the vote tally wouldn't have acurately represented the people's wishes.
A correct vote tally does not mean a correct representation of the voters (at least not with Bush around).

ltp-008 wrote:

Are you two assuming that majority of Americans are morons?

Of course! It's the government's own fault for spending too little money on education. Maybe if the American people were more well-educated, they'd know not to elect such STUPID governments in the first place!

ltp-008 wrote:

I have heard somebody said that Bush is an idiot and he is *beep*,but the fact is that Bush graduated from a famous university of Yale and he once was popular governer of Texas.

Popularity (especially of Texans, not to be generalizing) doesn't equal a just politican. It only equals a liked politican (for who-knows-what reason).
Also, graduating from Yale doesn't mean one is smart or just. It COULD mean these things, but it could also just mean the graduate is wealthy or celebrity-esque (and seeing that Bush's father was a president, I think this is the clear reason).

ltp-008 wrote:

It is unreasonable when you disagree with someone that you say he is liars or something like that and other people who support him are morons,other people have different opinons with you,this doesn't mean they are lower in intelligent than you ,you just have different understanding about certain things,people who voted for Bush are not easily cheated just like you ,they have their own judgements.

This argument really gets on my one last nerve.
NOT EVERYTHING IS "JUST SOMEONE'S OPINION", SOME THINGS ARE SIMPLY WRONG.
Bush is KILLING innocent people in Iraq. That's just his opinion?
Bush is not helping the thousands of homeless, starving families in America. That's just his opinion?
Bush is providing a poorly-educated new generation that will, someday, compose the politicians and leaders of America! That's just his opinion?
NO. These things are WRONG.
Death, homelessness, poor education? These things are wrong any way you slice them!

The REASON these people have a "different understanding" than I do is because they were badly educated by previous governments in the first place. Don't you see the cycle?

Some people don't see Bush's mistakes. This isn't their "opinion, that's just as justifiable as mine". No. This is WRONG. That's all it is!
It's not their fault, they probably were badly educated or malnourished or smoke pot in highschool or something else the government could be solving right now. But their opinion is NOT equal to everyone else's (in the respect of Bush's choices). It's WRONG.

These are very very very true words. (Sounds like a new prophet, I wonder whether I should burn a candle, or maybe a monument for "the flying pig")_________________If I say "I love you" to someone, then I also have to say "I also love everyone else inside you, I love the whole world because of you, I also love myself inside you." -- Erich Fromm, the Art of Love

he is a liar, why the people voted for him is because of lies and of culture, why there are still people voting for him is because they still believe in his lies

He's right-- Bush was NOT elected by the people of the US, he tricked his way into election (forcing minorities, who would've voted against him, away from the voting booths, etc.). Also, Bush didn't even WIN the popular vote, only the electoral college, so it is not true that the majority of Americans voted for him.

Regardless, I think a non-violent "coup" (if it really IS a coup if it's non-violent) is a perfectly legit way to get rid of an unjust authority.

I am not Republicans or Democrat,in some extent almost all politicians are liars,the key is who is smart liar and who is stupid liar.Before invading Iraq,both democratic senators and Republic senators and their congressmen and congresswomen supported to invade Iraq basing same intelligent information provided by intelligence agencies that Iraq had Weapon of Mass Destruction.Following the unpolular of Iraqi war,democrats began to oppose Iraqi war,this is very ridiculous ,they want to win midterm elections on November this year so they adapt their competition strategy .

The Bush administration had NO reason to believe that Iraq was holding WMD. The only reason they went in there was so Bush could kill all the Iraqis and further his macho appearance to the American citizens.

ltp-008 wrote:

Bush won Al Gore in 2000 presidential disputed election by decision of supreme court which solved the dispute peacefully by stopping recounting the voting ,in 2004 Bush won senator Kerry by large majority ,so Bush is legitimate president of the United States of America.

Even if the vote tally was correct, if Bush's people forced minorities out of voting booths, they wouldn't have voted alltogether, so the vote tally wouldn't have acurately represented the people's wishes.
A correct vote tally does not mean a correct representation of the voters (at least not with Bush around).

ltp-008 wrote:

Are you two assuming that majority of Americans are morons?

Of course! It's the government's own fault for spending too little money on education. Maybe if the American people were more well-educated, they'd know not to elect such STUPID governments in the first place!

ltp-008 wrote:

I have heard somebody said that Bush is an idiot and he is *beep*,but the fact is that Bush graduated from a famous university of Yale and he once was popular governer of Texas.

Popularity (especially of Texans, not to be generalizing) doesn't equal a just politican. It only equals a liked politican (for who-knows-what reason).
Also, graduating from Yale doesn't mean one is smart or just. It COULD mean these things, but it could also just mean the graduate is wealthy or celebrity-esque (and seeing that Bush's father was a president, I think this is the clear reason).

ltp-008 wrote:

It is unreasonable when you disagree with someone that you say he is liars or something like that and other people who support him are morons,other people have different opinons with you,this doesn't mean they are lower in intelligent than you ,you just have different understanding about certain things,people who voted for Bush are not easily cheated just like you ,they have their own judgements.

This argument really gets on my one last nerve.
NOT EVERYTHING IS "JUST SOMEONE'S OPINION", SOME THINGS ARE SIMPLY WRONG.
Bush is KILLING innocent people in Iraq. That's just his opinion?
Bush is not helping the thousands of homeless, starving families in America. That's just his opinion?
Bush is providing a poorly-educated new generation that will, someday, compose the politicians and leaders of America! That's just his opinion?
NO. These things are WRONG.
Death, homelessness, poor education? These things are wrong any way you slice them!

The REASON these people have a "different understanding" than I do is because they were badly educated by previous governments in the first place. Don't you see the cycle?

Some people don't see Bush's mistakes. This isn't their "opinion, that's just as justifiable as mine". No. This is WRONG. That's all it is!
It's not their fault, they probably were badly educated or malnourished or smoke pot in highschool or something else the government could be solving right now. But their opinion is NOT equal to everyone else's (in the respect of Bush's choices). It's WRONG.

These are very very very true words. (Sounds like a new prophet, I wonder whether I should burn a candle, or maybe a monument for "the flying pig")

This argument really gets on my one last nerve.
NOT EVERYTHING IS "JUST SOMEONE'S OPINION", SOME THINGS ARE SIMPLY WRONG.
Bush is KILLING innocent people in Iraq. That's just his opinion?
Bush is not helping the thousands of homeless, starving families in America. That's just his opinion?
Bush is providing a poorly-educated new generation that will, someday, compose the politicians and leaders of America! That's just his opinion?
NO. These things are WRONG.
Death, homelessness, poor education? These things are wrong any way you slice them!

The REASON these people have a "different understanding" than I do is because they were badly educated by previous governments in the first place. Don't you see the cycle?

Some people don't see Bush's mistakes. This isn't their "opinion, that's just as justifiable as mine". No. This is WRONG. That's all it is!
It's not their fault, they probably were badly educated or malnourished or smoke pot in highschool or something else the government could be solving right now. But their opinion is NOT equal to everyone else's (in the respect of Bush's choices). It's WRONG

I can understand your opinions,and respect your views,but I have some different thoughts about what you said:

Firstly you said that Bush is killing innocent people in Iraq,I don't think that way,the coalition forces is killing Al-Quada extremists and remainders of Saddam loyalty,they don't kill innocent people in Iraq,it is Islamic extremists are killing innocent people in Iraq by the name of Jihad,they want to force coalition to withdraw from Iraq in order to chieve their political goals which is to set up a extreme Islamic regime ,from there they can train terrorists to attack the Western world.

Secondly you said that Bush isn't helpping thousand of homelss and starving families,that's not ture,the US government has a program in which homeless people can find temporary shelters for them,there are also a lot non-profit charitable organizations which they help these homeless and starving people.However ,if you look at other countries,there are more homeless and starving families that their governments don't care about.

Thirdly you said that Bush doesn't pay an attention to education,I don't know if you know this program called "No child left behind".This is a program in which the government invests a lot of money to promote America educational system,this act requires local educational authorities must make every child to pass the grade lever in reading and math.You said that most of Americans are poorly educated,could I ask you a few questions?

one,is the America economy the strongest economy in the world?

Two,does America have most advanced technologies in the world?

Three,does America have lower unemployment rate at 4.6 percent in the world?

If you answer Yes,how could poorly-educated people in America get these achievements?

Of course there is no perfect nation in the world,we need make them better.

This argument really gets on my one last nerve.
NOT EVERYTHING IS "JUST SOMEONE'S OPINION", SOME THINGS ARE SIMPLY WRONG.
Bush is KILLING innocent people in Iraq. That's just his opinion?
Bush is not helping the thousands of homeless, starving families in America. That's just his opinion?
Bush is providing a poorly-educated new generation that will, someday, compose the politicians and leaders of America! That's just his opinion?
NO. These things are WRONG.
Death, homelessness, poor education? These things are wrong any way you slice them!

The REASON these people have a "different understanding" than I do is because they were badly educated by previous governments in the first place. Don't you see the cycle?

Some people don't see Bush's mistakes. This isn't their "opinion, that's just as justifiable as mine". No. This is WRONG. That's all it is!
It's not their fault, they probably were badly educated or malnourished or smoke pot in highschool or something else the government could be solving right now. But their opinion is NOT equal to everyone else's (in the respect of Bush's choices). It's WRONG

I can understand your opinions,and respect your views,but I have some different thoughts about what you said:

Firstly you said that Bush is killing innocent people in Iraq,I don't think that way,the coalition forces is killing Al-Quada extremists and remainders of Saddam loyalty,they don't kill innocent people in Iraq,it is Islamic extremists are killing innocent people in Iraq by the name of Jihad,they want to force coalition to withdraw from Iraq in order to chieve their political goals which is to set up a extreme Islamic regime ,from there they can train terrorists to attack the Western world.

Bush may not intend to kill innocent Iraqis, but soldiers do kill innocents without meaning to. It's in news reports and everything- this isn't even a debated issue. They DO kill innocents.
Granted they're in a ridiculously impossible situation: Teenagers and young adults in a foreign country under a lot of pressure and they are very scared. It must be very hard not to just shoot without thinking, and I am not angry at these soldiers.
But the fact is, they ARE killing civilians.

ltp-008 wrote:

Secondly you said that Bush isn't helpping thousand of homelss and starving families,that's not ture,the US government has a program in which homeless people can find temporary shelters for them,there are also a lot non-profit charitable organizations which they help these homeless and starving people.However ,if you look at other countries,there are more homeless and starving families that their governments don't care about.

The government could do a hell of a lot more to help.
If the government really WAS doing a lot, the number of homeless people in the US would be dropping.
It isn't.
Also, just because some other countries are doing a worse job with the homeless than America is doesn't mean we shouldn't keep helping, right? If anything, we should want to help more because we know other nations can't!

ltp-008 wrote:

Thirdly you said that Bush doesn't pay an attention to education,I don't know if you know this program called "No child left behind".This is a program in which the government invests a lot of money to promote America educational system,this act requires local educational authorities must make every child to pass the grade lever in reading and math.

This is the stupidest program ever. If you were an American student, you'd know.
The government is trying to dumb-down the "smart" students in order to try and close the achievement gap (which is the aim of No Child Left Behind). Obviously, this isn't what the country should be doing, but with such a poorly-designed program this is what's bound to end up happening.

ltp-008 wrote:

You said that most of Americans are poorly educated,could I ask you a few questions?

one,is the America economy the strongest economy in the world?

Two,does America have most advanced technologies in the world?

Three,does America have lower unemployment rate at 4.6 percent in the world?

If you answer Yes,how could poorly-educated people in America get these achievements?

Poorly-educated people didn't get these achievements. Well-educated people did. There is a huge range in America- a ridiculous variety.
It's like Capitalism for education: What ends up happening is that we get a huge range of well- to poorly-educated people. This is bad, and it still counts as America being poorly-educated as a whole.

ltp-008 wrote:

Of course there is no perfect nation in the world,we need make them better.

Yes. We need to make ALL of the world's nations better._________________peace-monger